There is a glaring difference in Ben Johnson's gameplan vs Seattle's D's strengths, along with in-game adjustments vs Fleury's gameplan and sticking with what doesn't work throughout the game. If Bears are rushing 4 most of the game, how about you run behind your brand new All-Pro guard to the left, when Jeffrey Simmons is lined up to the right? Mind-boggling.
This is a logical question. When an answer seems so obvious, I tend to think that if we could actually ask the coach himself he would give us a very fair explanation, if he was being honest. Maybe I'm too trusting and believe that people are competent, but I feel like there would be a reasonable explanation for not running to the left side more and we're just not getting transparent answers. That being said, it could also be incompetency.
At least the red zone offense is better than the red zone defense…
So yeah, the offense hasn’t looked good, but let’s be honest. The Seahawks would be 7-1 if the defense had more red zone stops.
They’ve been given the “short field” excuse. I think it’s the opposite. A defense that just got marched on a long drive is gassed. A defense with a short field just came back on the field after a break. Turn seven points into three, and that’s four points the offense doesn’t need to score.
And what happened to Special Teams? Last year, we had a strong advantage with starting position. This year, we’ve been neutral to in a hole.
This isn’t just Fleury. Players aren’t executing as well, across the whole team.
I say that we should stay pat. One characteristic of always-bad teams is churn. Let’s give Fleury more time to get right. And let’s give Nelson, Zabel, Charbs, and Price some time too. Bringing a new OC in today wouldn’t stabilize the line, or run game, calm Sam, or improve our 2nd+ receivers. It wouldn’t improve our defensive red zone performance, and it wouldn’t make ST more effective. Fleury is one component, but he is one of many who needs to improve.
As much as it would be awesome if the Seahawks were 7-1, I think the close margin of their losses also masks the fact that they lost to Washington, they got throttled by Chicago, and they should have played a hell of a lot better than they did against the Chargers.
Last year's Seahawks being 7-1 would've been like "Hell yeah they're 7-1, did you see them?? That's a GREAT team." This year's team being 7-1 would not in itself make it clear to people that the special teams is making way too many mistakes, that the runners who fumbled had way too little respect for protecting the ball, that the offensive line and the pre-snap penalties are sloppy and putting Seattle in way too many third-and-long, and the defense has had a few weaknesses exposed that teams are starting to recognize.
I'd love it if the Seahawks were 7-1 because then they might just fall backwards into the number one seed. However being 7-1, I think I'd be up against the wall this year writing stuff like "This is totally cool and all...but we all agree the team is worse, right?"
At this time last year, all three phases of the team were better. Special teams was a LOT better. Offense was a LOT better. Defense was a little better. And they were still turning the ball over a lot then too.
That's also why I say I'm not gonna say it's a "Brian Fleury issue" or a "Sam Darnold issue". If fans think only changing those names will flip Seattle instantly into a Super Bowl favorite, I would strongly disagree.
That was the second time this season that the Bears were at 100%. Caleb Williams was hurt in the Vikings game and didn’t come back until the Atlanta game. Montez Sweat was suspended for PED for the Atlanta and New England games. Then they add Jeffery Simmons. This was the first game all three of those played together. I am not saying we don’t have problems but last night we ran into a buzz saw and I wouldn’t be surprised to see Chicago run the table. Before we condemn our team too quickly let’s see how the rest of the Bear’s season goes.
Then again, what do I know? Dump Fleury and Donald ASAP.
I thought the play calling last night was atrocious...run, run, pass...and especially the drive in the fourth quarter when down two scores and we're running it(and not effectively)!!And running away from our new all pro guard but behind the guy with zero nfl starts...wtf!!
What happened to the quick passes on 1st and 2nd that worked so well in the chiefs game? It at the very least would have mitigated the strong pass rush.
Not sure if 8 games is enough to fire him but am not thrilled with his performance so far. No imagination that I can see. Having vented that I think all is not lost. The OL will take time to gel and the RBs will take time to get back into form. Now about Darnold....
I remember talking about Udinski when we were moving on from Grubb. Still like the work he's doing.
The problem with "8 games is not enough" is that's about half the season. It's a statistically significant portion of the season from which to draw conclusions. Especially when you think back a year to Kubiak and how in 8 weeks he tried a range of things and had by now figured out where the strengths were and how to press onwards.
Fleury is not as dire as Grubb but he looks lost. Even I might have to start conceeding that Shaheed ain't it (I stand by my position on AB whose getting the short end of the stick). But this offence should be good enough when paired with this defence. For it to not be is staggeringly bad. Something has to give, and it can't really be the players mid-season....
That said I do anticipate a high turn over off-season in personnel as well. Which we all knew was coming. But I'm firmly on the new OC line, and refreshing the WR and RB rooms. And the Edges. And DBs. And QB too.
I'll always remember 2025 fondly, hell of a season. But this year ain't it. But 2027 still plenty enough in place to make a go of it.
The one game with AB, the Seahawks ran the ball well. It's too bad that Zabel is even moving midseason instead of having made this transition offseason, although that's part of the reason you draft an OL player with versatility. To move him around. That being said, I wonder if the OL would just be better with AB for now. And where Zabel goes from there, I'm not sure, he could be C or RT. I wonder if Josh Jones shouldn't replace Lucas when Cross returns.
You say the Seahawks are 27th in turnovers, having 14 in 8 games. I’s be interested in how many they have in weeks 1 & 2 verses weeks 3 through 8? I’ll try and find it…
It looks like 1 total turnover in weeks 1 & 2. (0.5 per game) and 13 turnovers in the 6 weeks since Sam took over (2.17 per game.) Not all those turnovers were on Sam, but 9 of the 13 were interceptions thrown by Sam. Sam is averaging 1.5 interceptions per game in 6 games. By contrast Lock was not responsible for the single turnover in weeks 1&2. So Lock is averaging 0.0 turnovers per game. He also, in my opinion, looked more comfortable staying in the pocket and throwing with pressure in his face. Taking the hit. Sam is bouncing almost immediately as if the pressure is instantaneously on him (happy feet). It may take weeks for the new offensive line configuration to gel. Does that mean we will continue to suffer a turnover issue with Sam?
Yes, playoff Sam! I want him back! But he just looks so unsettled back there. I see him moving around even before he has to. It’s making it impossible to really look at option 2 and 3 and throwing the timing of the play way off. Not that there isn’t pressure, and too much of it and too fast. I hope it’s just a matter of time for the new O-line to settle in and Sam will calm down. I was a staunch Fleury supporter and I’m still hopeful, but the play calling on the dive that started at 8:30 left in the 4th yesterday had me pulling my hairs out (I wish) . In 2:30 they moved the ball 13 yards to the 25 when Sam threw the INT. I didn’t feel they needed to go 70 yards in 28 seconds as they did at the end of the first half, but they were acting as if they had all day?!?!? They only have 2 gears for hurry up. Smokin fast and tortoise slow.
I don't think it's fair to say that just because Lock started Week 2 and Darnold started Week 3, that they played under the exact same circumstances. I won't re-live the article I wrote a couple of weeks ago comparing the defenses and rates of pressure they faced. We have many years and many games with which to compare the two quarterbacks, including a season when Drew Lock led the NFL in interceptions, so I don't oversell Lock's one start against the Cardinals and Darnold clearly turning the corner in the middle of 2025 and Seattle going on a 10-game winning streak.
I can accept "Well, I just don't want to see Sam Darnold next week." That's fine, and I don't really have anything to lose by making a change at QB. I can't as easily go with "I know that Drew Lock is better."
Well, he's probably not. He might be because I'm an open minded fan willing to find out.
If anything, it would make more sense to try and flip around the offense entirely into an option team with Jalen Milroe. At least that would be different.
If they make a change, it will be somebody in the house. They have a couple candidates. Darnold is a mess. He has happy feet. He locks onto one receiver doesn’t look to a second and third options often enough. He still is the same guy, though he is mentally needs help and I don’t think he is getting it.
I don’t know what happened to the offensive line between last year and this year it doesn’t look the same
I’m firmly in the “8 games is not enough” camp for Fleury. He’s a work in progress, and the pieces he’s working with raise a lot more questions. 6 QB hits and 3 sacks - is that all on Fleury?
Defense had maybe its worst game of the McDonald era, special teams sh— the bed (except for Holani), Sam repeatedly threw the ball in the dirt in front of his receivers . . . and play-calling was the problem?
Early in the season, there were definitely good signs too! We should definitely see the OL after more time to figure themselves out following these recent changes. I wonder if Anthony Bradford at RG and Zabel at C would be considered an option, if not Zabel at RT.
The complete abandonment of Wilson, Holani, and Bradford after the KC win mystified me. Work in the new guys, for sure, but not a single rep for the back who ran for 100 last week?
There is a glaring difference in Ben Johnson's gameplan vs Seattle's D's strengths, along with in-game adjustments vs Fleury's gameplan and sticking with what doesn't work throughout the game. If Bears are rushing 4 most of the game, how about you run behind your brand new All-Pro guard to the left, when Jeffrey Simmons is lined up to the right? Mind-boggling.
This is a logical question. When an answer seems so obvious, I tend to think that if we could actually ask the coach himself he would give us a very fair explanation, if he was being honest. Maybe I'm too trusting and believe that people are competent, but I feel like there would be a reasonable explanation for not running to the left side more and we're just not getting transparent answers. That being said, it could also be incompetency.
Mcdonald talks about the Seahawk offense so I don't think they're looking for any innovators. They wanted somebody to come and replicate kubiak
Funny that they had a handful of interesting coaches who worked for him last year.
At least the red zone offense is better than the red zone defense…
So yeah, the offense hasn’t looked good, but let’s be honest. The Seahawks would be 7-1 if the defense had more red zone stops.
They’ve been given the “short field” excuse. I think it’s the opposite. A defense that just got marched on a long drive is gassed. A defense with a short field just came back on the field after a break. Turn seven points into three, and that’s four points the offense doesn’t need to score.
And what happened to Special Teams? Last year, we had a strong advantage with starting position. This year, we’ve been neutral to in a hole.
This isn’t just Fleury. Players aren’t executing as well, across the whole team.
I say that we should stay pat. One characteristic of always-bad teams is churn. Let’s give Fleury more time to get right. And let’s give Nelson, Zabel, Charbs, and Price some time too. Bringing a new OC in today wouldn’t stabilize the line, or run game, calm Sam, or improve our 2nd+ receivers. It wouldn’t improve our defensive red zone performance, and it wouldn’t make ST more effective. Fleury is one component, but he is one of many who needs to improve.
As much as it would be awesome if the Seahawks were 7-1, I think the close margin of their losses also masks the fact that they lost to Washington, they got throttled by Chicago, and they should have played a hell of a lot better than they did against the Chargers.
Last year's Seahawks being 7-1 would've been like "Hell yeah they're 7-1, did you see them?? That's a GREAT team." This year's team being 7-1 would not in itself make it clear to people that the special teams is making way too many mistakes, that the runners who fumbled had way too little respect for protecting the ball, that the offensive line and the pre-snap penalties are sloppy and putting Seattle in way too many third-and-long, and the defense has had a few weaknesses exposed that teams are starting to recognize.
I'd love it if the Seahawks were 7-1 because then they might just fall backwards into the number one seed. However being 7-1, I think I'd be up against the wall this year writing stuff like "This is totally cool and all...but we all agree the team is worse, right?"
At this time last year, all three phases of the team were better. Special teams was a LOT better. Offense was a LOT better. Defense was a little better. And they were still turning the ball over a lot then too.
That's also why I say I'm not gonna say it's a "Brian Fleury issue" or a "Sam Darnold issue". If fans think only changing those names will flip Seattle instantly into a Super Bowl favorite, I would strongly disagree.
Some points about the game.
That was the second time this season that the Bears were at 100%. Caleb Williams was hurt in the Vikings game and didn’t come back until the Atlanta game. Montez Sweat was suspended for PED for the Atlanta and New England games. Then they add Jeffery Simmons. This was the first game all three of those played together. I am not saying we don’t have problems but last night we ran into a buzz saw and I wouldn’t be surprised to see Chicago run the table. Before we condemn our team too quickly let’s see how the rest of the Bear’s season goes.
Then again, what do I know? Dump Fleury and Donald ASAP.
I give the Bears plenty of credit. Yet if they lose to the Bucs next week, I won't be entirely shocked.
I don't know if 8 games is enough🤷♂️
I thought the play calling last night was atrocious...run, run, pass...and especially the drive in the fourth quarter when down two scores and we're running it(and not effectively)!!And running away from our new all pro guard but behind the guy with zero nfl starts...wtf!!
What happened to the quick passes on 1st and 2nd that worked so well in the chiefs game? It at the very least would have mitigated the strong pass rush.
Not sure if 8 games is enough to fire him but am not thrilled with his performance so far. No imagination that I can see. Having vented that I think all is not lost. The OL will take time to gel and the RBs will take time to get back into form. Now about Darnold....
8 is a large sample, although it's still a pretty small sample when the coach hasn't OC'd before.
True that.
I remember talking about Udinski when we were moving on from Grubb. Still like the work he's doing.
The problem with "8 games is not enough" is that's about half the season. It's a statistically significant portion of the season from which to draw conclusions. Especially when you think back a year to Kubiak and how in 8 weeks he tried a range of things and had by now figured out where the strengths were and how to press onwards.
Fleury is not as dire as Grubb but he looks lost. Even I might have to start conceeding that Shaheed ain't it (I stand by my position on AB whose getting the short end of the stick). But this offence should be good enough when paired with this defence. For it to not be is staggeringly bad. Something has to give, and it can't really be the players mid-season....
That said I do anticipate a high turn over off-season in personnel as well. Which we all knew was coming. But I'm firmly on the new OC line, and refreshing the WR and RB rooms. And the Edges. And DBs. And QB too.
I'll always remember 2025 fondly, hell of a season. But this year ain't it. But 2027 still plenty enough in place to make a go of it.
The one game with AB, the Seahawks ran the ball well. It's too bad that Zabel is even moving midseason instead of having made this transition offseason, although that's part of the reason you draft an OL player with versatility. To move him around. That being said, I wonder if the OL would just be better with AB for now. And where Zabel goes from there, I'm not sure, he could be C or RT. I wonder if Josh Jones shouldn't replace Lucas when Cross returns.
You say the Seahawks are 27th in turnovers, having 14 in 8 games. I’s be interested in how many they have in weeks 1 & 2 verses weeks 3 through 8? I’ll try and find it…
It looks like 1 total turnover in weeks 1 & 2. (0.5 per game) and 13 turnovers in the 6 weeks since Sam took over (2.17 per game.) Not all those turnovers were on Sam, but 9 of the 13 were interceptions thrown by Sam. Sam is averaging 1.5 interceptions per game in 6 games. By contrast Lock was not responsible for the single turnover in weeks 1&2. So Lock is averaging 0.0 turnovers per game. He also, in my opinion, looked more comfortable staying in the pocket and throwing with pressure in his face. Taking the hit. Sam is bouncing almost immediately as if the pressure is instantaneously on him (happy feet). It may take weeks for the new offensive line configuration to gel. Does that mean we will continue to suffer a turnover issue with Sam?
Lock may turn it over less. If we're using really really sample sizes as evidence, what about the 2025 playoffs?
Yes, playoff Sam! I want him back! But he just looks so unsettled back there. I see him moving around even before he has to. It’s making it impossible to really look at option 2 and 3 and throwing the timing of the play way off. Not that there isn’t pressure, and too much of it and too fast. I hope it’s just a matter of time for the new O-line to settle in and Sam will calm down. I was a staunch Fleury supporter and I’m still hopeful, but the play calling on the dive that started at 8:30 left in the 4th yesterday had me pulling my hairs out (I wish) . In 2:30 they moved the ball 13 yards to the 25 when Sam threw the INT. I didn’t feel they needed to go 70 yards in 28 seconds as they did at the end of the first half, but they were acting as if they had all day?!?!? They only have 2 gears for hurry up. Smokin fast and tortoise slow.
Different coaching & playcalling, different RB's, shouldn't compare 2025 playoffs right?
I don't think it's fair to say that just because Lock started Week 2 and Darnold started Week 3, that they played under the exact same circumstances. I won't re-live the article I wrote a couple of weeks ago comparing the defenses and rates of pressure they faced. We have many years and many games with which to compare the two quarterbacks, including a season when Drew Lock led the NFL in interceptions, so I don't oversell Lock's one start against the Cardinals and Darnold clearly turning the corner in the middle of 2025 and Seattle going on a 10-game winning streak.
I can accept "Well, I just don't want to see Sam Darnold next week." That's fine, and I don't really have anything to lose by making a change at QB. I can't as easily go with "I know that Drew Lock is better."
Well, he's probably not. He might be because I'm an open minded fan willing to find out.
If anything, it would make more sense to try and flip around the offense entirely into an option team with Jalen Milroe. At least that would be different.
If they make a change, it will be somebody in the house. They have a couple candidates. Darnold is a mess. He has happy feet. He locks onto one receiver doesn’t look to a second and third options often enough. He still is the same guy, though he is mentally needs help and I don’t think he is getting it.
I don’t know what happened to the offensive line between last year and this year it doesn’t look the same
Was thinking the same, probably Peetz.
Can you believe I went through this whole article intending to write about in-house options and then I forgot?
Something for tommorow.
I’m firmly in the “8 games is not enough” camp for Fleury. He’s a work in progress, and the pieces he’s working with raise a lot more questions. 6 QB hits and 3 sacks - is that all on Fleury?
Defense had maybe its worst game of the McDonald era, special teams sh— the bed (except for Holani), Sam repeatedly threw the ball in the dirt in front of his receivers . . . and play-calling was the problem?
Were some of those dirt throws dump offs to avoid a sack?
Early in the season, there were definitely good signs too! We should definitely see the OL after more time to figure themselves out following these recent changes. I wonder if Anthony Bradford at RG and Zabel at C would be considered an option, if not Zabel at RT.
I'd love to see Bradford and Q's power in the middle on run plays.
The complete abandonment of Wilson, Holani, and Bradford after the KC win mystified me. Work in the new guys, for sure, but not a single rep for the back who ran for 100 last week?